The Microsoft Question
By John Dillon
Lawyers with expertise in high-tech companies took sides in the Microsoft anti-trust debate in this CFP lunchtime workshop, with the audience wading in as expert witnesses.
Briefly stated the issue is this: it is not a violation of anti-trust law to be a monopoly; it is only when companies use their market power to engage in anti-competitive practices to preserve their monopoly that they break the law.
The panel, led by attorney Barry Rein, showed there are many Microsoft questions, with many conflicting answers.
The actions the software giant stands accused of -- and the claims the Justice Department investigated but has not proved -- include using its clout to cut prices to squelch competition, offering "free" applications such as WordPerfect only if customers buy its operating system, and of making unrealistic promises (vaporware) of pending products that freeze development of competing software. Competitors also argue that Microsoft engages in "compatibility blocking" -- making its operating system in a way that other applications will not run smoothly on Microsoft systems. Taken as a whole, the companies action could be anti-trust. But the top Department of Justice anti-trust official has admitted that even with the 18,000 person hours the government devoted to the case last year, Microsoft may be too big to tackle, workshop participants said.
Microsoft also owns the desktop real estate on the vast majority of computer systems. The value of that real estate was proved recently in the Microsoft-America Online deal, in which AOL got a place on the desktop.
Simson Garfinkel, speaking from the audience, argued that the problem is not just Microsoft. Rather, it is the nature of the software licensing agreement. Under the agreement, the buyer is not allowed to resell the software in altered form -- such as with the Microsoft Network icon removed.
[ CFP96 Newsletter | CFP96 | CFP | general info ]
Comments and bug reports to Daniel C. Stevenson